Google giving the OK to Premium Publishers Cloaking?

When i was browsing on Matt Cutts blog, i noticed a comment about a Premium Adsense Publisher cloaking. Anyhow i went and checked it out, and sure enough it's useragent cloaking but when i reloaded Matts blog the comment was gone.. Deleted.

Anyhow i watched the site long enough to see if Google were going to take action, and they haven't. Search something like:

This search term

Notice how it's bolded in the description? Click the link and the content isn't there, just a whole bunch of Adsense.

See what the page is cloaking to Google instead.

Much different, they are feeding a ton of content to Google to generate rankings/traffic and a face full of Adsense to users. This is a site with a sub 20k Alexa, PR6, Sitelinks, also over 20 DMOZ listings pointing to pages that only have a snippet of an article and the rest is cloaked (so much for only listing quality content).

We are looking at an easy $xxx,xxx paid by Google for cloaking and running Adsense on cloaked pages with that traffic.

I guess we get banned because we don't make Google enough money like this site.

 

It's not cloaking it says 'You must be a logged on user to view the rest of this article'.

 

How the hell is it not cloaking?

They are showing one thing to users, and another to search engines. Perhaps you need to go and read about cloaking, specifically Useragent cloaking which is what is happening here.

 

Hey, they are showing the full content only to the logged in users and that's pretty normal. They are not stuffing extra content for search engines, only restricting visitors from seeing the content if they are not logged in.

A lot of forums also do that. Nothing is wrong with that. Perhaps YOU should read about cloaking.

 

I remember reading this, If I'm correct (was half-asleep as the time) the useragent just scans the content so It can produce AdSense ads where the googlebot can't see (you must login etc), therefore theirs nothing wrong with it.

EDIT: Never mind I'm talking about a different recent change lol

 

lol you just don't get it do you?

So you are saying it's fine to serve a bunch of content to Google, and be ranked for those keywords and get traffic for those terms but not display it to people and show ads instead?

Imagine if the whole net done this?

They are Useragent cloaking plain and simple.

 

I agree with sweetfunny on this, this is cloaking, just a bit more deceptive than your usual cloaking.

 

Lol, I just don't know how to explain it more clearly to you. They are not stuffing meaningless keywords or something. It's not black hat. They have a REAL article there and they DO SHOW it to the users, but only to the logged in ones.

They have a real artice there and deserve the ranking for that. They are not deceiving anyone. If you want to read it just sign up. It's a promotion technique to get users sign up to your site. Don't you get it?

 

Look, please just give up now you seriously have NO CLUE what the hell you are on about.

Yes Google do have a program called First Click Free which enables what you are going on about BUT the site MUST present the full content to the searcher coming from a Google query.

This site is CLOAKING plain and simple.

 

It is cloaking already and I saw the same issue for another site before. I thought it could be some arrangement or code that allows them to do so (specially that you will find now "cached snapshot" of the pages at google).

 

Expert Exchange did something very similar to this, anyway their entire website nearly got dropped by Google, therefore they have to show the same content to both search engines & visitors.

 

Yes it sure is cloaking, they have even removed the "Cached" version using the Meta NOARCHIVE so you can't click the cache link in the SERP's to view the page Googlebot sees.

Strange how Matt Cutts deleted the comment from his blog if the whole thing was so innocent.

 

@ sweetfunny
Do you know why Google have policies against cloaking? Cause people were stuffing their pages with lots of relevant keywords to rank higher although they didn't have anything useful to offer on the subject.

But this is not the case here at all. They have an article containing the exact sentence you are searching for. Yes, the exact damn sentence. Do you think they shouldn't be ranking there in spite of the fact that they have the most relevant article on what you are searching for? They are not hiding anything from the users. They only require an action by the user to get access to it.

I'm telling you this is pretty fine for Google and the fact that you believe it's cloaking won't change anything. Ask whoever you want.

If you are selling mp3s you may choose to allow users to listen to a preview and require them to log in or pay in order to get access to the full version. This is the same with your articles. It's your digital property and you can require users to log in to view the full version. This doesn't change the fact that your source is a credible and quality one.

I give up, cause you won't accept you are wrong. So believe what you want.

Thanks

 

Rubbish!
If they have shown Google bot a real article, but do not show that same article to humans, then they do not deserve to rank for the whole article.

I wonder if Google bot had to sign up to see all of the article?
Its not a promotion technique! its deception/cloaking at its finest.

Just because someone calls a pyramid scheme, a multilevel market, does not change the fact it is still a pyramid scheme.

Cheers
James

 

Please tell me who says they don't show the same article to the people?

 

You are wrong mate. If users are required to login to see the full article, the search engine bots would also be required to login in order to see the full article. But since the search engine bots cannot login, there is NO way they can index the full article. The page is cloaked in such a way that the bots are able to access the full article whereas the visitors are not. Now, If that is not cloaking, then what is!

 

Where in the Google bible does it say you can't use useragent cloaking? It's your f-cking website, after all.

 

Ok yesterday, I tried to view a music video on Dailymotion and they said: Sorry, this video is not available in your country.

Youtube does the same thing. Is that also cloaking? WTF?

Some videos rank pretty high but only displayed to the US viewers. Then they are also cloaking.

What this site does is more innocent than that. They only require you to log in. They don't expect you to move to another country.

Got it?

 

Hello...

well to be honest im not sure whom is right or wrong or whether this guy is cloaking or not
but my only question is...

Why is he allowed to remove the Google Ads Logo or "Ads by Google" as i thought that was
not allowed by google adsence?


thx
malcolm

 

1.31 average page views per visitor, tells me that most people don't sign up, therefor most people do not see the article that Google bot thinks is there.

Call it want you want, the fact is, its cloaking.

Cheers
James